Title

Communities secretary, Eric Pickles, says bodies such as APSE can help maintain service quality in the wake of the abolition of the Audit Commission. Mark Bramah, who runs APSE's performance networks – the UK's largest voluntary benchmarking system –says self-generated service improvement is more important than ever The announcement by communities secretary, Eric Pickles, that the Audit Commission is to be abolished, has left many in local government puzzled about what will take its place, and how they will be regulated and inspected in future. Some may mourn its passing, while others breathe a sigh of relief at the end of an era of central government-imposed national performance frameworks, targets and inspection in the shape of best value, the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) and most recently, the Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA). But what, if anything, will replace it? Mr Pickles' army of armchair auditors holding their councils' performance and value for money to account may, of course, usher in a new age of citizen accountability. But there are surely not too many council taxpayers who want to spend their weekends pouring over details of all council spending above £500, whether published online or not. We do, however, have some indications of what the future may hold for performance management. There is going to be a new national improvement and efficiency programme, and a bank of national ‘productivity data' on local government performance. Websites such as www.openlylocal.com also contain information on some 140 local authorities. In response to a question from a member of the House of Commons Communities and Local Government select committee on 13 September, on how local authority performance would be monitored in future, Mr Pickles referred to APSE's performance networks as a reliable source of comparative information for local authorities, among organisations which would help maintain the quality in local government in the commission's absence. Performance Networks is a robust benchmarking tool which has been in existence for more than 12 years. It involves at least 200 local authorities, and enables them to compare costs and quality across 14 frontline local government services – from refuse collection to housing repairs, highways and school meals. We are proud that even during the era of central targets and national performance indicators, it prompted councils to take responsibility for their own improvement and develop accountable local performance frameworks between themselves. We have long been conscious of the need for public services to be able to demonstrate the competitiveness of their services, and this can only be done effectively if data on costs and efficiency can be assessed in equal measure against achieving wider outcomes and customer satisfaction. Performance Networks gathers detailed data on a range of issues, including cost of service, productivity, staff sickness absence, outputs – such as street cleanliness standards – and customer satisfaction. APSE always argued that any world-class inspection regime for local government should work itself out of existence or at least to an optimum minimum level. Performance management embedded continuous improvement in the culture of local government. In its final report on the impact of the CPA, the commission found that ‘excellence' had increased, with 42% of councils judged to be in the highest category of performance by 2008, an increase from 15% in the first year in 2002. Weak performance became rare, with no council receiving a zero star rating in 2008, and only four at the next level, compared with 34 councils rated as ‘weak' or ‘poor' in 2002. So, maybe we should not lament the passing of the commission too much, as it had probably achieved as much as it could in acting as a catalyst driving improvement. Its demise certainly does not mean councils can rest on their laurels. If anything, pressure to monitor performance is greater than ever. In the era of public spending cuts, the renewed emphasis is going to be on value for money. Whether we like it or not, that means a much sharper focus on unit costs and outputs. If local authorities cannot demonstrate with a renewed vigour that their services are competitive, they are likely to come under fire. We accept the challenge set out by the communities secretary for local government to demonstrate local services can deliver greater value and improve efficiency. We also welcome his belief that APSE is among the organisations which can help authorities rise to that challenge. It is our view that systems such as Performance Networks can play a greater role in ensuring the transparency of local performance to citizens and council taxpayers. An established, independent performance-measurement system is essential to give ministers and voters alike a reliable reflection of how a service or authority measures up. In the age of the armchair auditor, local performance is king. Mark Bramah is assistant chief executive at the Association for Public Service Excellence (APSE)

Title

WHITEHALL

Life after the Audit Commission

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING